News Limited published photos of the destruction that followed a violent outburst by Grant Hackett in October last year while his wife Candice Alley and two children were in the home. The images showed holes punched in walls, a bedroom door all but obliterated and his wife’s grand piano tipped over on its side.
The damage was done after an alleged boozy turn at Derby Day. At the time Hackett told media the incident was an ‘unfortunate understanding’ and that the family was ‘100 per cent OK’.
Candice and Grant announced their split in May this year.
The fallout from incident has caught up with the former swim star, who is also set to commentate for Channel Nine during this year’s Olympics. A children’s charity set up in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre to protect children from violence – The Allanah and Madeline Foundation – informed Hackett’s management he was no longer required as an ambassador last week, before the photos were published.
Hackett’s employers Westpac and Channel Nine have both stated he remains with them.
Here’s what else is on our radar today and from the weekend:
1. And Eurovision was on over the weekend, complete with catchy music and a bit of pizzazz in the fashion stakes. Sweden won the competition in an upset.
3. Horrific footage has emerged from Syria over the weekend. At least 32 children were among 108 slaughtered in the Syrian town of Houla by the regime they seek to topple. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has increased his crackdown on anti-government protestors.
4. Can it be true, have TV bosses finally accepted we want ‘older’ women on our television screens? News Limited tallied the range of more mature women on our TV screens over the weekend and found:
“Lisa Wilkinson, 52, has notched up five years as the co-host of Channel 9’s breakfast show Today, Juanita Phillips, 48, presents ABC’s evening news, Channel 7 newsreader Kay McGrath is 55, A Current Affair host Tracy Grimshaw is 51, and 60 Minutes reporter Liz Hayes is 56.”
Speaking of experienced journos, you might recognise these:
5. It’s a new week and that means … more leadership speculation. PM Julia Gillard is fending off another round of chatter about her grip on the top job after Immigration Minister Chris Bowen granted mining boss Gina Rinehart an allowance to import 1700 mining workers which the PM then claimed she knew nothing about. But did she? That’s the question that has her party talking.
6. Supermarket giants Coles and Woolworths rely on cheap labour in places like South Africa and Thailand to produce their growing range of home brand items creating increased competition in the grocery sector. Are you a home brander?
Top Comments
Pat,You are right
I've noticed that pretty much every comment on the Grant Hackett report is saying that we don't know what happened, it might have been her who did it and that either way it's a private matter. The same kind of comments occured with the Italian father whose wife fled with the kids. Every comment said that we don't know if he was abusive and she was the one who did something wrong. There were only one or two comments here that actually bothered saying "IF he did it then that's terrible" - most of them just stopped at "we don't know who did it, it's a private matter".
Is this really helpful? Yes, it's good to be aware of when we do or don't have certain facts, and yes a certain amount of speculation is healthy. But why are people so incredibly loathe to criticise a man* accused of DV?
That's a serious question - why? Are we afraid to look like we're suckers who believe anything the media tells us? Or are we really genuinely skeptical of DV allegations, because we think women have a habit of lying about these things? If so, why do we have this attitude? Have we always, or is it a reaction against feminism or something (like, refusing to automatically side with the woman in case we just look like hysterical women backing each other without facts)?
These comments show that we refuse to accept or believe - or even comment on the possibility - that Grant Hackett trashed the room or commited DV. Despite photograhic evidence, despite police comments, despite newspaper reports. MM is primarily a site for women, and this is the nature of our responses. I hate to think what the general public (eg men and women together) or a men's interests commentators would think.
It kind of makes you understand why DV victims stay quiet and stay put, if this is the attitude they face when speaking out. I'm not having a go at people for having this attitude, I'm just really shocked and concerned that it's so prevailent.
* I say man not women because the reports have involved alleged DV from the men perpetrated against the women. I'm not suggesting that women never perpetrate DV or that men can't be victims of it.
I totally agree. I find it really concerning and bizarre. I always liked GH, he seemed like a nice guy. But I'm going to go ahead and just use logic to summise what I think happened:
1) the room obviously got trashed by someone
2) she is a mini person, and I would be incredibly surprised if she managed to do that much damage to the room. I'm strong and even i would struggle to overturn a piano. If I tried, I'm pretty sure my husband would have no trouble intervening at some point and stopping me before I trashed our whole house.
3) he's massive. He has enough strength to do that damage.
4) Men are statistically more often the perpetrators of DV than women. Clearly someone got violent that night and statistics suggest that it's more likely to have been the man than the women. Not because men are evil (most are bloody fantastic) but because some individuals are d***heads. On the basis of statistical probabilities alone, it was more likely that he commited the DV than her.
5) the papers have reported he trashed the room and through Candice against the window. Do we think that they are lying? Where did they get this from? Did they just 100% make it up? Did the police 100% make it up then lie to the papers? I know that papers can be biased etc sometimes, but I hold Australian journalism standards highly enough that I'll believe there's at least some solid truth somewhere in an article like that.
I'm going to go ahead and say it - based on the photos and multiple newspaper reports, I believe that he trashed the room. If my husband did that I would be utterly terrified and devastated. Does it mean GH is a chronic wife beater? No. But it certainly means he has problems, and that this was a frightening and unacceptable act of violence.
I don't think it's controversial to say that I think he did it and that I think that's terrible and unacceptable. I don't understand why everyone else seems to be running away from making a stand! I know it's just in an online comment - so "making a stand" in this context isn't changing the world or even doing anything mildly brave. But that goes even more to the point - even anonymously, people won't support an allegeded DV victim. They'd rather wash their hands of it and make their only comment be that they can't comment. WTF?